[Ads-l] YouTubery

[Ben Zimmer]

We've discussed the use of relative "that's" (or "thats") in the past, e.g.:

https://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/ads-l/2009-February/thread.html#87948
https://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/ads-l/2011-February/thread.html#106816
https://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/ads-l/2011-March/thread.html#108003
https://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/ads-l/2017-November/thread.html#149868

And here are posts by Neal Whitman, Stan Carey, Mark Liberman, and James
Harbeck on the topic:

https://www.visualthesaurus.com/cm/dictionary/gear-up-for-national-grammar-day/
https://literalminded.wordpress.com/2011/03/23/we-dont-speak-the-same-language/
https://stancarey.wordpress.com/2013/03/20/i-guess-thats-why-they-call-thats-the-whose/
https://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=11394
https://theweek.com/articles/441268/future-english-includes-apostropheless-thats

--bgz

On Tue, Aug 2, 2022 at 8:13 AM Mark Mandel <markamandel at gmail.com> wrote:

> context *or* dialect
>
> MAM
>
> On Tue, Aug 2, 2022, 8:11 AM Mark Mandel <markamandel at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Seen this occasionally. An extension of the animate-inanimate distinction
> > between "who" and "that".
> >
> > Of course "that" can be used with animate referents -- "the man that
> > called yesterday" -- but standard grammar calls for "that" or "which" as
> > relative pronoun for inanimates, and "*which's" is awkward to pronounce
> and
> > is not used in any context of dialect AFAIK, unlike "that's" ("That's
> > right").
> >
> > MAM
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 1, 2022, 9:15 PM Wilson Gray <hwgray at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> "... an art exhibition _that's_ theme was violence ..."
> >>
> >> --
> >> - Wilson
>

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org